Joseph Duran et al v. The Hershey Company

Filing 51

ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND DISMISSING CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 8/18/15. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/18/2015)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

JOSEPH DURAN, et al.,

Case No. 14-cv-01184-RS

Plaintiffs,
8
v.
9
10

THE HERSHEY COMPANY,

ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT AND DISMISSING
CLAIMS WITH PREJUDICE

Defendant.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

This Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) retaliation case has settled, and the parties seek

13

judicial approval of their agreement. See Lynn’s Food Stores Inc. v. Dep’t of Labor, 679 F.2d

14

1350, 1352-53 (11th Cir. 1982). The “proper procedure for obtaining court approval of the

15

settlement of FLSA claims is for the parties to present to the court a proposed settlement, upon

16

which the district court may enter a stipulated judgment only after scrutinizing the settlement for

17

fairness.” Lee v. The Timberland Co., C 07-2367-JF, 2008 WL 2492295, at *2 (N.D. Cal. June 19,

18

2008). Approval is warranted if “the settlement is a fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide

19

dispute.” Id.

20

The settlement agreement in this case is fair and reasonable. As far as can be determined

21

from the available materials, this matter involves a genuine and fact-intensive dispute. By settling,

22

each side has chosen to avoid the risk and expense of trial. Moreover, the four remaining

23

plaintiffs will each receive a substantial payment, relative to their claimed damages, in exchange

24

for releasing their claims. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

25
26

1.

Approval of the settlement agreement, including the releases contained therein, the

payments to plaintiffs and plaintiffs’ counsel’s attorney fees and costs, is GRANTED.

27

2.

All parties are bound by the terms of the settlement agreement.

28

3.

This action, Duran, et al. v. The Hershey Company, No. 3:14-cv-01184-RS, is

1

hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and on the merits. The court reserves and retains

2

exclusive and continuing jurisdiction over the above-captioned matter, the settlement agreement,

3

and the parties for the purposes of supervising the implementation, effectuation, enforcement,

4

construction, administration and interpretation of the settlement agreement.

5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6
7
8
9

Dated: August 18, 2015
______________________________________
RICHARD SEEBORG
United States District Judge

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER GRANTING APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT; DISMISSING ACTION
CASE NO. 14-cv-01184-RS
2